https://t.co/6vG32dHsH1 pic.twitter.com/Cfoqyj2Hpa
— ๐ฌ๐๐ ๐ฎ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐ฝ๐๐ โ๏ธโ๏ธโ๏ธ (@Christusregant) June 22, 2024
Context:
Incest porn is sanctified by god himself. Checkmate beliefcucks:
This struggle session goes on for a while:
Quick bring up Hitler too:
Antisemitism in my wholesome discussion about Jesus? Yikes:
@jesus defend yourself.
1. Disrespect towards God and the Church is not allowed here.
2. We honor the dignity of life from the womb to the tomb.
3. Debate about Scripture, tradition, politics, etc. are allowed when they do not directly contradict rule 1 (controversial history is an open topic when people are respectful).
4. Trolling, coomerisms, and poorly attempted humor may receive the mop at the discretion of those in charge.
5. Pray for your family, pray for your community, pray for your nation, and pray for rDrama.net. We need it! Prayer works!
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
These tards don't realize that if they applied the same rigorous standards to everyone else it would blow away just about everything we know from before the Roman Empire and a lot of that too. And don't say it's different because the Greeks were rational believers in science not superstition. Half the time when people wrote about Pythagoras they considered him a god, sometimes even the same thing as Apollo. It's really easy to find accounts of him using supernatural powers and really hard to find anything in math that he invented.
Or for frick's sake, let's look at Euclid. The encyclopedia will tell you (based on nothing) that he was a Greek mathematician. What do we really know about him? We have the name Euclid and its from Egypt. That's it. That's our entire knowledge of the guy. Is he even a guy? Maybe "Euclid" is the name of a god, group of people, or a school, or the book itself. Maybe Euclid was a girl. Not only do we have no proof of this guy's existence, we have no proof that he was even supposed to be a guy at all.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Most of our knowledge of Alexander the Great comes from sources that came a century after his death.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Sure, but corroborated by extensive archeological evidence -- much more than Jesus.
I'm not popping in here to debate whether Jesus existed, though. He probably did. My doubts involve the supernatural elements and whether the accounts about Jesus were all actually about a single person.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Let's not get ridiculous
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
No. Everyone that agrees with me is a based Richard Dawkins Le Atheist.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Also, consider that these were biographies about famous philosophers and kings, the oldest surviving account of Alexander's the Great life was written by Plutarch centuries later. There were likely older sources though based on Ptolemy I memories but still, the Gospels are not about a great King, there are about a peasant preacher from an insignificant province and they were written just a few decades after his dead, I don't understand why Christ mythicist find it so hard to believe some apocalyptic preacher was crucified by the Romans and that his followers were sincerely convinced of his resurrection to the point of preserving and spreading his teachings.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Agreed, 100%. !historychads, the "Jesus wasn't real" cope has always baffled me. Even if we completely discount anything and everything written by his apostles or their followers, decidedly non-Christian historians like Josephus and Tacitus wrote their accounts just a few decades after Jesus's death. People that were alive at the time of the crucifixion were still around. This was not some ancient tale to them.
Given that at the time of his death, Jesus was nothing more than the leader of some unusual religious sect in a far-off Roman province, that's a shocking amount of evidence. Especially when you factor in how few writings from the period have even survived to the present day.
Could you imagine if other classical figures were held to the same standard? For instance, if Aristophanes' The Clouds and a couple bits of Timon of Philius's Silloi hadn't survived antiquity, the only written accounts of Socrates we'd have would be ones written by his students and his students' students. If we're discounting Paul as a source, we've got to discount Plato. And Timon of Philius was born 79 years after Socrates died, whereas Josephus was born 4 to 7 years after Jesus died.
So Socrates is real because The Clouds wasn't one of the dozens of Aristophanes plays lost to the sands of time, but Jesus is fake because none of the contemporary writings about him managed the same? That's all it takes? Because if any classicist tried to answer the "Socratic problem" with "Socrates was a fictional character. He didn't exist.", they'd immediately be laughed out of the room.
I'll be frank, people that insist Yeshua of Nazareth is a purely religious invention with no basis in historical fact are typically petulant children that have somehow made it to adulthood and are still throwing a tantrum because mommy and daddy made them go to church. You know... morons.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Tldr?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Who was Jesus?
Is Jesus Jehovah?
Do the things that Jehovah said count as Jesus?
Do the things Jesus said count as Jehovah?
Who was Jesus' historical dad?
Who was Jesus' historical mom?
What did he historically do?
What did he historically say?
Did he walk on water?
Did he feed two separate groups of thousands a meal with just a few fishes and loaves of bread?
Why did he murder a tree for not bearing fruit out of the season he created it to bear fruit?
When did Jesus die? Was Jesus crucified on the day when you slaughter a lamb (Matthew Mark Luke) or the day after (John)?
!atheists
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
None of these questions are difficult to answer if you don't expect some absurd level of precision. Which is what makes the whole thing so ridiculous. No one demands a perfectly accurate biography of any comparable historical figure. But for reasons that definitely have nothing to do with childish tantrum throwing, it's expected of Jesus.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Therefore we don't know what he peached and therefore should not have a religion based around him.
Therefore Jesus wasn't a God and therefore we should not have a religion based around him.
Therefore we should not have a religion based around him.
uwu papi
harder papi
Best explanation ever
Yes it does because only 1/4 Canonic Gospels named Jesus "The Lamb Of God," yet Christians honor this title despite the other Gospels require 2 or 3 witnesses, which means John is not a valid witness, and therefore Jesus is NOT the Lamb of God.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Motherlover, this whole thread is about how people deny the historicity of Jesus. I'm not Christian. I'm not advocating for the religion. Which you might have figured out if you had bothered reading. But no. You're too busy "fricking loving history" to actually learn anything about it.
!r-slurs, come get your boy. He needs a ride home.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I was 50/50 on who was winning this argument until you tagged a ping group to back you up. Kitty
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
So like, maybe let's determine if the Arians or the Constantinites were the correct version of Christianity!
Did Luther reform enough? !lutherans
Or did Calvin get it right? !calvinists
Did the Trinity align enough with Aristotalian Greek philosophy derived from Plato's Republic? !Christians
Or was everything too fricked up and required a prophet to reveal God's truth? !mormons !islam
!r-slurs or maybe I'm r-slurred?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
You're just r-slurred yeah. Constantine favored Arianism over Nicene doctrine and is not even considered a Saint as a result. He repeatedly banished bishops in favor of what is now Orthodoxy.
!historychads
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
So why is it heresy to say that Jesus is separately the Son of God and that the Trinity is hella gay?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
Jesus was probably a Jewish apocalyptic preacher who was crucified by the panties pilot, perhaps for political reasons like calling himself the king of the jews. Some of his sayings probably survived. That's about it I think.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Are you fricking kidding me?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Where and when was he born and why doesn't the timeline line up with Augustus?
Why did Mary and Joseph have to travel to an ancestor's home when that wasn't a Roman tax practice?
Why did Jesus tell Nicodemus that everyone must be "born again" which is a linguistic pun that can also mean "born from above" but only makes sense in Greek, when Jesus didn't speak Greek?
!atheists
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Joseph Smith, Muhammad and L Ron Hubbard also have a ton of r-slurred contradictory teachings and claims of miracles and details about their life stories that don't add up. That's a problem for Mormons, Muslims and Scientologists claiming their religious teachings are true rather than an argument against their founders existing as historical figures.
I think all religions are bullshit, as historical phenomena they still have founders and it's more likely that the minor executed Jewish preacher that these 1st and 2nd century sources squabble about was a real human with supernatural nonsense ascribed to them than a total fabrication.
If completely made up, you run into questions like why Paul wrote in letters to preexisting Christian communities about getting in fights with Jesus' actual surviving friends and family, disagreeing with them about teachings, and Paul trying to compensate for having never actually met Jesus when he addressed audiences. Or why Jewish author Josephus mentions that a James "the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ" was tried and executed during the leadup to another failed Jewish rebellion.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Mormons have zero problems because the head of the church can simply say "I speak to God, and God told me."
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Please include Moses alongside
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
The Nativity stories were made up to fit the prophecies.
The only thing we can say about historical Jesus is that he was an apocalyptic preacher from Galilee who got crucified by the Romans, probably because of that scene he made in the temple. If that actually happened he would be arrested in site and his โtrialโ wouldn't last more than a few minutes.
The Baptism by John seems historical as well as baptism indicated he was John's follower and initially part of his cult. That's something early Christians would be ashamed off, that's why in the Gospels Jesus humblebrags โNo John, it's ok if you Baptize meโ.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
You're doing the exact thing this thread was addressing. In a /H/ouse of God, no less.
https://www.catholic.com/magazine/print-edition/the-truth-of-the-nativity-story
I can and will sperg out on you, b-word. Don't you dare besmirch the Holy Family here. You should trust humanities professors whose jobs require taking a specific position far less.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Based, dab on these atheists.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
Why would Jesus be required to be baptized for Christianity to work when Christianity didn't exist
The Sanhedrin were not legally allowed to operate at night by Jewish law
Also when Jesus died, who was the person who reported that the veik at the temple tore? !atheists
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
What?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
Okay but Pythagoras was a god and he was completely in the right about smiting that square root of two dude.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
I forgot to tag !historychads so im gonna use your comment for it.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context